Young, Neil John & Ors v Pioneer Concrete (Vic) Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 245

Young, Neil John & Ors v Pioneer Concrete (Vic) Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 245

Because the respondent was the successful party and the Court was not satisfied that it had conducted its case unreasonably, there was no reason to depart from the normal rule that costs follow the event. The trial judge also lacked authority to make the requested procedural orders for the foreshadowed appeal, which were matters governed by the Federal Court Rules and, for appeal papers and listing, by the Chief Justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 April 1996
Procedural Posture
Federal Court Proceeding for Declaratory Relief Concerning Construction of a Lease / Supplementary Reasons for Judgment on Form of Orders, Foreshadowed Appeal Directions and Costs After Reasons Published on 26 March 1996
Outcome
Declaratory relief made in agreed form; applicants ordered to pay the respondent's costs; no orders made concerning the foreshadowed appeal.
Legal Topics
['construction of Lease' 'rent Review Clause' 'declaratory Relief' 'appeal Procedure' 'costs Following the Event']
['property Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['construction of Lease' 'rent Review Clause' 'declaratory Relief' 'appeal Procedure' 'costs Following the Event']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Federal Court Proceeding for Declaratory Relief Concerning Construction of a Lease / Supplementary Reasons for Judgment on Form of Orders, Foreshadowed Appeal Directions and Costs After Reasons Published on 26 March 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What declaratory relief should be ordered to give effect to the decision on the proper construction of the lease.' "Whether the Court should make orders relating to the applicants' foreshadowed appeal, including filing and service of notices, settlement of appeal papers and fixing an appeal date." 'Whether the successful respondent should receive all of its costs or only 50% of its costs up to 23 February 1996.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent was the successful party and the Court was not satisfied that it had conducted its case unreasonably, there was no reason to depart from the normal rule that costs follow the event. The trial judge also lacked authority to make the requested procedural orders for the foreshadowed appeal, which were matters governed by the Federal Court Rules and, for appeal papers and listing, by the Chief Justice.

Court Disposition

Declaratory relief made in agreed form; applicants ordered to pay the respondent's costs; no orders made concerning the foreshadowed appeal.

Orders

  • ['The Court declares that, on a proper construction of the lease of the premises situate at the First Floor, 1183 Toorak Road, Hartwell between Catchklin Pty Ltd and Pioneer Concrete (Vic) Pty Ltd made 1 January 1990, the rent payable under the lease must be reviewed in respect of each successive 18 month period of...